Journal of Biblical Literature - Society of Biblical Literature

Book Reviews
tors in constructing an inclusive ideology that intentionally combined the rival streams
of thought known to us as P and D. Hence, while denying Wellhausen’s appointment of
Ezekiel as “architect of Judaism,” Levitt Kohn nevertheless awards the prophet another
major role: Ezekiel established an integrated ideology that went beyond the preexilic
separate Priestly and Deuteronomistic schools of thought. This ideology is considered to
go hand in hand with Ezekiel’s self-presentation as a second Moses (pp. 109–10) and his
“dream of unified national theology” (p. 118).
Levitt Kohn’s overall thesis is based on examination of the nature of the relationships
between Ezekiel and P and Ezekiel and D/Dtr. In chs. 3 and 4, she concentrates
on common lexical expressions and terms. She briefly discusses ninety-seven phrases
shared by Ezekiel and Priestly sources (including H) and twenty-one phrases shared by
Ezekiel and D/Dtr. These lexical lists are certainly one of the main benefits of the book.
They suggest more similarities by far than have been presented in the previous general
or specific studies of S. R. Driver, Millar Burrows, Avi Hurvitz, Jacob Milgrom, Baruch
A. Levine, Robert Polzin, and Mark F. Rooker.
Levitt Kohn classifies the terms and phrases common to P and Ezekiel (ch. 3) in
order to illustrate not only shared language but even thematic resemblances and differences.
She presents ten categories of content (p. 30): Yahweh’s relationship to Israel;
covenant; land; social structure; law; holy days; tabernacle/temple and priesthood; ritual;
humans, animals, and plants; and miscellaneous.
In discussing Ezekiel and D/Dtr expressions (ch. 4), Levitt Kohn does not employ
classifications of content; she lists mainly idioms that testify to “shared terminology,”
common not only to Ezekiel and D/Dtr but also to Jeremiah. Nevertheless, she argues
for the direct connection of Ezekiel to D/Dtr. Special attention is given to the relationship
of Ezekiel and D/Dtr where alternative P idioms are absent (e.g., ch. 4, idioms 9,
17) and particularly where they are present (e.g., idioms 4, 5, 7, 8). Following the lists in
chs. 3 and 4, Levitt Kohn adds a conclusive analysis of each.
The most persuasive discussion in this book is ch. 5: “Fusing P and D/Dtr in
Ezekiel.” Although the examples are relatively scant, Levitt Kohn considers them to be
“the most illuminating aspect of Ezekiel’s use of P and D” (p. 96). Indeed, the author’s
insights on Ezekiel’s synthesis of P and D are thought-provoking.
Reading carefully through chs. 3 and 4 of the book raises several methodological
questions. First, there is no methodological explanation of how the lists were compiled.
Should one conclude from the study that Levitt Kohn has exhausted the idiomatic
resemblances between the literary compositions she studied? One may note at least two
missing idioms. The first is shared by Ezekiel and P: al haddaµm (“to eat with the
blood”; Ezek 33:25 and Lev 19:26, elsewhere found only in 1 Sam 14:33–34). The second
is shared by Ezekiel, H, D, and Jeremiah: >aµsåâ tô>eµbâ (“to commit abominations”;
Ezek 16:50; 18:12; 22:11; 33:26, etc., and Lev 18:26–30; 20:13; as well as Deut 18:12 and
Jer 7:10; 44:22).
Second, Levitt Kohn’s focus on the literary-historical relationships of the texts
under scrutiny unfortunately kept her from considering in ch. 3 both the stratification of
P and H and the literary complexity of the book of Ezekiel itself (mainly chs. 1–39 and
40–48). This aspect of the procedure is left without sufficient explanation (p. 30); it is
particularly questionable as one studies the list of idioms and its analysis (pp. 31–85) and
343